If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
it drives me nuts...
each year, our church has either a women's retreat where they go away
for two nights and have a speaker, or a conference where they have a speaker for Friday evening and multiple sessions on Saturday but at the church so no one has to stay away from home. Each year the only restriction placed on attendance is no nursing babies. Now for the retreat, that would be unrealistic anyway, though they also add in that you may not stay offsite, thus making it impossible for a nursing mum, the retreat location is an hour away from the church, so attending for the day and staying at home is possible and positively encouraged when the mens retreat is at the same location. We are blessed with a big church building with extensive facilities, a father could quite happily entertain a baby somewhere in the building, the mum could set her cell phone on silent and no one would even know. But if baby is quiet, why should she have to go away, if dad brought baby at lunch time why shouldn't she nurse her baby at the lunch table? If the baby is very young and does just sleep and eat and mum is in tune with them, why on earth can't she have them in a sling and sit at the back? I'm convinced someone thinks that if they allow nursing babies it will actually mean toddlers running around over the whole church distracting everyone. They don't even follow up the no nursing babies rule with a polite, we can provide somewhere for you to express and store your milk, it's a big church, not everyone will ask, you can't assume these things. I think what annoys me most is that given the size of the church, I think this kind of statement appearing once a year will influence someone, I really think there will be one baby out there where this date on the mum's schedule will influence how long they breastfeed for. Some women will not go, some will go and express milk, others will go and baby will get formula not ebm, but somewhere in the pile, there will probably be someone for whom this was a factor in introducing bottles last month and them no longer breastfeeding. I hate the fact that if I even mention this to anyone I'll be labelled as a lactivist. The view of the church probably assumes that this is just a rule which will determine whether someone attends, or how they manage things on that day. Not something that given the size of the church probably will mean one child get's less breastmilk than it might otherwise have done, possibly several months less. Anne |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
it drives me nuts...
In article ,
Anne Rogers wrote: each year, our church has either a women's retreat where they go away for two nights and have a speaker, or a conference where they have a speaker for Friday evening and multiple sessions on Saturday but at the church so no one has to stay away from home. Each year the only restriction placed on attendance is no nursing babies. Oooh, I would be hopping mad if it were my church! And I would be asking what their problem was. Why would a bottle-fed baby/toddler be less annoying than a BF one? If they said "no facilities for babies", that would be different, but it looks like they are getting at the BF babies only. The women's conventions I have attended have always had facilities for mothers, BFing or otherwise: a separate room with CCTV, change tables, toys and so on. Babies are not allowed in the main auditorium, and there are no facilities for older children. The larger convention I go to at Easter has a children's program that covers children of all ages. The creche has an area where BFing mothers can sit and listen to the talks while they feed their babies. (If anyone is interested, these are run by the Katoomba Christian Convention, http://www.kcc.org.au/ -- originally modelled on the Keswick Conventions.) Frankly, I'm appalled by your church's attitude. Looking after mothers with babies, whatever the feeding method, is not rocket science! -- Chookie -- Sydney, Australia (Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply) http://chookiesbackyard.blogspot.com/ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
it drives me nuts...
In article ,
Anne Rogers wrote: each year, our church has either a women's retreat where they go away for two nights and have a speaker, or a conference where they have a speaker for Friday evening and multiple sessions on Saturday but at the church so no one has to stay away from home. Each year the only restriction placed on attendance is no nursing babies. Tell them that Jesus was breastfed. -- Anita -- |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
it drives me nuts...
Chookie wrote:
In article , Anne Rogers wrote: each year, our church has either a women's retreat where they go away for two nights and have a speaker, or a conference where they have a speaker for Friday evening and multiple sessions on Saturday but at the church so no one has to stay away from home. Each year the only restriction placed on attendance is no nursing babies. Oooh, I would be hopping mad if it were my church! And I would be asking what their problem was. Why would a bottle-fed baby/toddler be less annoying than a BF one? If they said "no facilities for babies", that would be different, but it looks like they are getting at the BF babies only. I guess it's supposed to be obvious there is no childcare and the comment is directed at nursing women who might think a no children rule doesn't apply to them. The women's conventions I have attended have always had facilities for mothers, BFing or otherwise: a separate room with CCTV, change tables, toys and so on. Babies are not allowed in the main auditorium, and there are no facilities for older children. I've experienced similar, though mostly there hasn't been a restriction on babies being in the main auditorium, but probably also not a specific area set up to be helpful. If the church wanted to do it this way though, they already have a cry room set up, with one way glass and intercom. The larger convention I go to at Easter has a children's program that covers children of all ages. The creche has an area where BFing mothers can sit and listen to the talks while they feed their babies. (If anyone is interested, these are run by the Katoomba Christian Convention, http://www.kcc.org.au/ -- originally modelled on the Keswick Conventions.) Frankly, I'm appalled by your church's attitude. Looking after mothers with babies, whatever the feeding method, is not rocket science! Me too! I mostly think that what they do for children/babies is ok, but we only moved here when DD was 15 months old, so I've not really dealt with having a nursing baby in this setting. But subtle things can make a big difference, just by the way things are set up. In our old church, if a baby needed feeding during bible study and they weren't with you already, someone would bring them to you in the bible study. Numbers and distances mean we have pagers at this church and I've never seen a mum come back in the room with a baby after fetching them to nurse them. Some young babies do stay with their mothers in the study, but they leave when they have to nurse them! Which is actually more disturbing than if they just nursed them if we were going to quibble about it being a disturbance issue. Anne |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
it drives me nuts...
On Nov 11, 12:49?am, Anne Rogers wrote:
each year, our church has either a women's retreat where they go away for two nights and have a speaker, or a conference where they have a speaker for Friday evening and multiple sessions on Saturday but at the church so no one has to stay away from home. Each year the only restriction placed on attendance is no nursing babies. Now for the retreat, that would be unrealistic anyway, though they also add in that you may not stay offsite, thus making it impossible for a nursing mum, the retreat location is an hour away from the church, so attending for the day and staying at home is possible and positively encouraged when the mens retreat is at the same location. We are blessed with a big church building with extensive facilities, a father could quite happily entertain a baby somewhere in the building, the mum could set her cell phone on silent and no one would even know. But if baby is quiet, why should she have to go away, if dad brought baby at lunch time why shouldn't she nurse her baby at the lunch table? If the baby is very young and does just sleep and eat and mum is in tune with them, why on earth can't she have them in a sling and sit at the back? I'm convinced someone thinks that if they allow nursing babies it will actually mean toddlers running around over the whole church distracting everyone. They don't even follow up the no nursing babies rule with a polite, we can provide somewhere for you to express and store your milk, it's a big church, not everyone will ask, you can't assume these things. I think what annoys me most is that given the size of the church, I think this kind of statement appearing once a year will influence someone, I really think there will be one baby out there where this date on the mum's schedule will influence how long they breastfeed for. Some women will not go, some will go and express milk, others will go and baby will get formula not ebm, but somewhere in the pile, there will probably be someone for whom this was a factor in introducing bottles last month and them no longer breastfeeding. I hate the fact that if I even mention this to anyone I'll be labelled as a lactivist. The view of the church probably assumes that this is just a rule which will determine whether someone attends, or how they manage things on that day. Not something that given the size of the church probably will mean one child get's less breastmilk than it might otherwise have done, possibly several months less. Anne Is it no "nursing" babies or no "babies" at all? If bottle fed babies were allowed, I'd be up in arms, but I can see it not really being a "retreat" in the full sense of the word with babies present. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
it drives me nuts...
Is it no "nursing" babies or no "babies" at all? If bottle fed babies were allowed, I'd be up in arms, but I can see it not really being a "retreat" in the full sense of the word with babies present. Very specifically "no nursing babies". It's interesting that the women's retreat, also says that you are not allowed to just go for the day and that you have to stay onsite. The men's retreat at the same location had specific packages recognising that some of the older men wouldn't want to stay overnight and they even organised a coach to take them there for the day. Some other guys who couldn't make the whole weekend arranged a car pool so they could spend Saturday evening there. Making it such that you have to stay onsite, suddenly turns difficult but possible for a nursing mum into impossible. There are numerous other reasons why that set up excludes people, I lost track of how many people said to me last year how glad they were it was a conference at church, not a retreat, so that they were able to go. Thinking back to the nursing babies in a conference type setting, a nursing baby is no more of a disturbance than someone with a weak bladder who needs to go to the toilet frequently getting up to go out, or someone with chronic pain issues who needs to keep moving around, or someone with a stubborn cough. If it was said you could only attend such an event if you would sit still in your seat and only go to the bathroom or to get a drink at allocated times, that would be discrimination, but when it involves a nursing baby, it's suddenly ok. Anne |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
it drives me nuts...
In article ,
Anne Rogers wrote: I guess it's supposed to be obvious there is no childcare and the comment is directed at nursing women who might think a no children rule doesn't apply to them. Then you write "No babies allowed." And they have chosen not to put that. I would be asking someone why. Numbers and distances mean we have pagers at this church and I've never seen a mum come back in the room with a baby after fetching them to nurse them. Some young babies do stay with their mothers in the study, but they leave when they have to nurse them! Which is actually more disturbing than if they just nursed them if we were going to quibble about it being a disturbance issue. Sounds like you have some work to do there! -- Chookie -- Sydney, Australia (Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply) http://chookiesbackyard.blogspot.com/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Britney drives on highway with male sitting on her lap!!!!!!!! | Alina | General | 3 | February 14th 06 12:01 AM |
Britney drives on highway with male sitting on her lap!!!!!!!! | Alina | Solutions | 3 | February 14th 06 12:01 AM |
it drives me nuts.... | Anne Rogers | Pregnancy | 28 | August 19th 05 10:50 PM |
AU: Child support drives dads to dole: study | Dusty | Child Support | 8 | October 16th 04 09:24 PM |
My motorcycle drives faster than sound | wrestleantares | General | 0 | January 21st 04 07:26 PM |